Partial Verdict Reached in Takeover of Oregon Wildlife Refuge, Notes Indicate

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/26/us/partial-verdict-reached-in-bundy-trial.html

Version 0 of 1.

PORTLAND, Ore. — A federal jury indicated on Tuesday that it had reached a partial verdict in the trial of Ammon and Ryan Bundy and five of their followers, who face felony charges stemming from the armed takeover of a federal wildlife sanctuary in Oregon in January.

But two separate notes, sent to the judge from the jury room in Federal District Court here, also suggested that the panel was having trouble reaching consensus on all of the defendants — apparently agreeing on three of the seven — and that one juror, a former government employee, may have expressed bias to at least one other juror.

Judge Anna J. Brown questioned Juror 11, who had worked for two federal agencies as a firefighter about 20 years ago, and who had told the court that fact during jury selection and was seated anyway. Judge Brown said she was satisfied with his answers and demeanor and sent him back to the jury to resume deliberations Wednesday morning. She said she was also sending a note to the panel, telling them that the charges and defendants were all to be considered separately, so a finding on three defendants would not affect their verdicts or deliberations on the rest.

But the new complications, which came on the third day of deliberations, added another layer of uncertainty to a case that gripped the nation earlier this year with its public debate about government powers, public lands and constitutional rights. Ammon Bundy’s lawyer, Marcus R. Mumford, told the court he believed more inquiry was needed into whether the jury was affected by potential bias. Judge Brown said that she was satisfied for the moment, but that she would allow further argument on Wednesday morning, out of the jury’s presence.

The jurors did not indicate in their notes which defendants or charges they had agreed upon, or give any suggestion about their findings. They could also change their minds when deliberations resume.

In a monthlong trial, the defendants never denied that they occupied and held the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters for nearly six weeks, demanding that the federal government surrender the 188,000-acre property to local control. But their lawyers argued that prosecutors did not prove that the group had engaged in an illegal conspiracy that kept federal workers — employees of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Land Management — from doing their jobs.

In final arguments to the jury last week, prosecutors and defense lawyers presented starkly different stories that the 12-member panel might consider in reaching a verdict.

Ethan D. Knight, an assistant United States attorney, argued that the case was simple: Mr. Bundy had been selective in deciding which laws applied to him and had led an armed seizure of property that did not belong to him, interfering with federal workers.

Mr. Mumford said the issues raised by the trial were as big as the West and the United States Constitution. Acquitting Mr. Bundy, he argued, would be a victory for all Americans. “They’re deceiving you,” Mr. Mumford said, gesturing to the prosecutors. “It’s the government that picks and chooses the rules it’s going to comply with.”

Ammon Bundy, 41, a business owner and son of Cliven Bundy, a rancher in Nevada known for leading anti-government protests, testified for three days in his own defense. He asserted that the takeover was spontaneous and informed by religious belief. But prosecutors, through witnesses and their final arguments, said the group used the threat of force and violence, crystallized by Mr. Bundy’s call for followers across the nation to come to the refuge with guns.

The seven defendants are charged with multiple felony counts, including weapons charges, and could face long prison sentences. Both Bundy brothers, along with others who were at the refuge, are also charged in a criminal case in Nevada over a standoff in 2014 at the Bundy ranch south of Las Vegas. In that episode, an armed group tried to prevent federal officials from seizing cattle owned by Cliven Bundy, who had refused for years to pay the government grazing fees. That trial is scheduled to begin in February.